Legality of Wiretaps

[Herr Scholz]

So, Alberto Gonzalez is currently being grilled by the Senate Judiciary Committee over the legality of this domestic eavesdropping program of Bush's. Two questions: does Bush's perceived authority in this matter extend to opening mail and why is the administration trying to get the Patriot Act passed if they're going to ignore the laws on the books anyway?

I'll hang up and listen.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060206/ap_on_go_co/eavesdropping_congress;_ylt=AtfuOzBZPZb7X3zDX1xwMh ms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

[longhorn gdc]

Here is a perfect example of a rabble-rousing horn starting a thread guaranteed to instigate bickering and squabbling.

[RacerX]

going for #2 are you?

[Pieces Hit]

Back when they were making the first Star Wars movie,
they tapped on a suspension cable on a radio tower with a microphone to get the laser sounds they used.
That was cool and quite legal.

[yermom]

yep, that was cool

Herr, you want another 9/11, don't you?

why can't you just let the FBINSACIA do their jobs?

i'm just waiting for the day that they decide that people looking at pr0n are terrorists, then they can finally get those bastards

[Herr Scholz]

Herr, you want another 9/11, don't you?

No, but there's a rubber stamp court set up for this and what's disturbing to me is that the FISA law is being totally ignored. They can apply for warrants days after they setup a wiretap and this is a court that NEVER says no. Their arguments don't hold water as to why they're ignoring this law. What's to say they won't start opening mail in the name of national security? Maybe your mail or phone calls or internet usage.

[KABOOKIE]

Can we ban this terrorist? Or, would that viloate some panzie liberal's civil rights?

[TheHumanAlphabet]

ICE ICE Baby...

[OklahomaTuba]

Amazing how spying on people wasn't illegal when Clinton was doing it.

But of course, now that we are at war we all know who Al Herr is rooting for to win.

[OklahomaTuba]

So, Alberto Gonzalez is currently being grilled by the Senate Judiciary Committee over the legality of this domestic eavesdropping program of Bush's. Two questions: does Bush's perceived authority in this matter extend to opening mail and why is the administration trying to get the Patriot Act passed if they're going to ignore the laws on the books anyway?

I'll hang up and listen.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060206/ap_on_go_co/eavesdropping_congress;_ylt=AtfuOzBZPZb7X3zDX1xwMh ms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

I'm curious to know if the courts should approve every search they do, such as having a judge standing by at the airport to approve some flunkie to look at your bags before getting on a plane?

And doesn't the USPS already x-ray the mail? Isn't that a search???

Better make that illegal as well. We can't have this security thing going on now.

[OklahomaTuba]

BTW, I think this puts this well into perspective for those who have a brain and use it.


Missing in the debate over the program to eavesdrop on suspected terrorists without a warrant is the question of whether or not it works.

A 2004 NBC report graphically illustrated what not having this program cost us 41/2 years ago. In 1999, the NSA began monitoring a known al Qaeda "switchboard" in Yemen that relayed calls from Osama bin Laden to operatives all over world. The surveillance picked up the phone number of a "Khalid" in the United States — but the NSA didn't intercept those calls, fearing it would be accused of "domestic spying."
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/62988.htm

The author lost her brother on 9/11.

[Okla-homey]

The choice is not between order and liberty. It is between liberty with order and anarchy without either. There is danger that, if the Court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact. -- Justice Robert H. Jackson

[OklahomaTuba]

The choice is not between order and liberty. It is between liberty with order and anarchy without either. There is danger that, if the Court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact. -- Justice Robert H. Jackson
Nice. A "little practical wisdom" is certainly a good thing. Too bad the ACLU and other leftists don't get that.

Much better than mis-quoting Ben Franklin as well. ;)

[Herr Scholz]

Nice. A "little practical wisdom" is certainly a good thing. Too bad the ACLU and other leftists don't get that.

Much better than mis-quoting Ben Franklin as well. ;)
What this quote?


"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." [ Benjamin Franklin ]

I'm all for common sense. I'm also for our government following the laws they pass. Getting a warrant from a foreign intelligence court set up especially for this sort of thing would not hinder any of the wiretaps. And comparing bag searches at an airport to illegal domestic wiretaps that go against the 4th amendment doesn't hold water either and you know it, Tuba.

And, Tuba, when the Patriot Act was passed, opponents such as myself argued that it was a slippery slope that would lead to the erosion of personal liberties. Proponents such as yourself argued that every search being done had a legal warrant. Not so much, huh?

And nice use of Clinton. Amazing how Conservatives always seem to fit him into the conversation. It's an art form, really. If this is such a partisan issue, what about the Republicans such as Arlen Specter that have a problem with it?

[Tear Down This Wall]

Look, there are only two reasons this is an issue. First, because George W. Bush is the president. Bill Clinton did this to American citizens, in the ghetto, and no one said a word about it. Every president since the NSA's inception has used it.

The second is that the Democratic Party is so void of ideas about how to lead the country that all they can do is say, 'Look at what George Bush did! Isn't that illegal? We think it's illegal!'" The Democrats are like five year old kids trying to talk mom and dad into giving them candy - here, the American voters are the mom and dad, and control of the Congress is the candy.

Like all good parents, the American voters long ago tuned out the whining, leaving the Democrats to whine to themselves. The more they are ignored (repudiated in elections) the more shrill they cry.

[Herr Scholz]

Look, there are only two reasons this is an issue. First, because George W. Bush is the president. Bill Clinton did this to American citizens, in the ghetto, and no one said a word about it. Every president since the NSA's inception has used it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but these searches were done with warrants I believe.


The second is that the Democratic Party is so void of ideas about how to lead the country that all they can do is say, 'Look at what George Bush did! Isn't that illegal? We think it's illegal!'"
Arlen Specter is a Democrat now?

[OklahomaTuba]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but these searches were done with warrants I believe.

Ugh, that would be incorrect.

Look up Aldrich Ames and the spying over Oklahoma that took place after the OKC bombing by satcom.

[OklahomaTuba]

What this quote?
Well, this one actually...

http://media.michellemalkin.com/images/franklinquote.jpg

Seems to be one of the more abused quotes out there.

[OklahomaTuba]

I'm all for common sense. I'm also for our government following the laws they pass. Getting a warrant from a foreign intelligence court set up especially for this sort of thing would not hinder any of the wiretaps. And comparing bag searches at an airport to illegal domestic wiretaps that go against the 4th amendment doesn't hold water either and you know it, Tuba.I agree they should get it, even if its just some judge blessing the data without any real knowledge of what it contains because of the mass of it all.

And again, whats the difference between bag searches at the airport looking for possible terrorists, and searching voice data looking for terrorists???

Both are searches, and neither have a judge approving each and every search. Yet one is legal and one isn't? Total Bull****.



And nice use of Clinton. Amazing how Conservatives always seem to fit him into the conversation. It's an art form, really. If this is such a partisan issue, what about the Republicans such as Arlen Specter that have a problem with it?Kind of like lefties such as you calling Bush hitler, hmm?

And yes, nevermind that Clinton just happened to be the last Prez. How dare we look back at history to see the double standards of the past. :rolleyes:

[Herr Scholz]

Ugh, that would be incorrect.

Look up Aldrich Ames and the spying over Oklahoma that took place after the OKC bombing by satcom.
I stand corrected then. And I think that was illegal as well.

[Herr Scholz]

Seems to be one of the more abused quotes out there.
Well the message is the same. That's a paraphrase.

[Herr Scholz]

IAnd again, whats the difference between bag searches at the airport looking for possible terrorists, and searching voice data looking for terrorists???
Let's see, if you go on a plane, you're consenting to a search. Not so when you make a telephone call. That's why the 4th amendment exists. Surely you can differentiate between and accept the fact that some searches are legal and some aren't right? Why have warrants at all ever if a search is a search is a search?

You think any of these searches would stand up in a court of law? No.

[yermom]

Let's see, if you go on a plane, you're consenting to a search. Not so when you make a telephone call. That's why the 4th amendment exists. Surely you can differentiate between and accept the fact that some searches are legal and some aren't right? Why have warrants at all ever if a search is a search is a search?

You think any of these searches would stand up in a court of law? No.

you don't have to go to court to sit in prison for ever though, you don't even have to be charged

[Hatfield]

so basically this thread is:

Herr: if there are going to be rules they should be followed.

Tuba: you hate america and I make complete sense as always even when it
appears to most that I am not in fact making sense

Herr: not saying all searches are bad, just that we should strive to follow our self imposed rules.

Tuba: rush is so right about you people. Al Herr (tee hee); broad generalizations...rabblerabblerabble

[Herr Scholz]

Tuba: you hate america...
Tuba is sincere in his beliefs and I respect that. He does have a tendency to paint those on the left of the political spectrum as unpatriotic though and I don't think that is the case at all. In fact, political discourse and criticism of our leaders is a requirement for American citizenship. Personally, I think the administration is wrong on this policy.


"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic
and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." [Theodore Roosevelt ]

[Skysooner]

This is a very slippery slope that the government is engaged in. First it is terrorists, next it is suspected tax evaders, etc. There has to be total oversight on this before I feel comfortable giving the government any power of this kind.

[soonerscuba]

This thread turned out as well as I expected. But Jesus, Specter laid into AG (weird).

[longhorn gdc]

going for #2 are you?

I've got your #2 right here.

[RacerX]

Whatever. Thanks for the gray dot.